Image: gguy / Shutterstock.com
Advertising on YouTube is meant to stand out—not just flash briefly somewhere so that it barely meets legal requirements. That is precisely the issue addressed in a ruling by the Bamberg Regional Court. The judges made it clear: a brief notice at the beginning of a sponsored video is not sufficient if viewers cannot clearly recognize its promotional nature.
As reported by the website heise online, the case was triggered by a video from a so-called “finfluencer”—a portmanteau of “finance” and “influencer.” The video featured a brokerage app, a platform that allows users to trade stocks and other financial investments. The Baden-Württemberg Consumer Protection Agency saw this as a problem: the video was apparently sponsored, but the agency felt the disclosure was not clear enough.
The clue was there—but apparently far too subtle
Although the message “Contains paid advertising” appeared at the beginning of the video, this notice was only visible for about ten seconds. In the court’s view, that is insufficient. There was also another issue: while the video description mentioned sponsorship, the actual sponsor was not specifically named.
That is precisely the crux of the matter. Viewers shouldn’t have to wonder whether they’re seeing unbiased information or a paid endorsement. Anyone watching a video should be able to easily tell that commercial interests are at play. And this should be clear—not hidden, not half-hearted, and not just for a fleeting moment.
Why the ruling is controversial
Das Landgericht Bamberg sieht darin einen Verstoß gegen den Digital Services Act, also das europäische Regelwerk für digitale Plattformen. Im Urteil heißt es sinngemäß, der werbliche Charakter sei nicht „hinreichend transparent und in Echtzeit deutlich gemacht“ worden. Das ist eine Formulierung, die aufhorchen lässt. Denn sie zeigt: Es reicht künftig wohl nicht mehr, Werbung einfach irgendwo unterzubringen. Sie muss so gekennzeichnet sein, dass normale Nutzer sie wirklich verstehen.
This is a sensitive issue for YouTube and many creators. After all, sponsored content has long been a part of everyday life on the platform. If courts now apply stricter standards, it could call into question many of the labeling practices that have been standard up to now.
Critical assessment
The ruling is not yet final. YouTube has already stated that it intends to review the details and then decide on the next steps. So the matter is not yet completely settled.
Nevertheless, the direction is clear: anyone who is paid must state this openly and transparently. Anything else comes across as disguised advertising. And it is precisely this gray area of the influencer world—where, in the end, everyone wants to claim they’re “just recommending” things—that is likely to become legally much more problematic.
Source: heise.de
Want to know how this ruling will affect your advertising strategy? Contact us now for legal advice!
to the lawyerAt a fixed price of 169 EURO (gross)
